Figment

You said you don't take any precautions. Thus you're a bad BB player. There is lots of things you can do, but since you clearly never tried to ask anyone but rather make redundant false claims I suggest you just go back to getting torped.

I just don't get it. It should be a total no brainer. Why don't people understand the rules of domination mode / capture the base? You can point it out as often as you want to people. Some of them won't cap, often argueing that it's more exp to win by killing than it is by cap. People prefer to risk a loss or draw over a certain win. At tier 1, okay. Tier II? Alright. Tier III? Really? Tier 8? What? I mean. How hard is it to understand you have 20 minutes. That time is limited and you need to traverse a lot of space, so you need to minimise the time you need and need to be on your way as fast as possible. I see people linger for minutes at end wasting 9-10 km of travel time on circling or sailing away from the next target. Why can't people plan ahead? If people on my team listened at least for a minute or two and cap the zones and take a head start (or at least take it back in time to not lose too much)... they'd have all the time they wanted because they'd pressure the enemy into taking unwanted shortcuts. Instead, people don't seem to understand: 1. Basic logistics in saving time. Whether it is lingering or planning your route to be shorter, or planning your route such that you can cover more areas of the map with your range. 2. Can't set priorities in targets (lets all focus on the high health slow firing one, while we let the HE spamming ship make us all use our repairs / kill our DDs / let our cruisers die to its AP spam). 3. Don't know the rules. "Oh really you can't cap if there's another ship in the circle?" 4. Don't realise +50% exp is more than the few exp from a kill. "Kill all! More exp!" 5. Don't realise staying alive == win, entering a fight at low health == risking defeat, i.e. take four 3K health ships into combat against one full health Cleveland or so. 6. Seem to think: "That thing in / near cap / will be in cap in a minute? What about it? It will be there in 2 minutes and I can get there in 1-3 minutes, so? They're not capping NOW are they? I'll just wait two minutes and then see if someone else isn't going and then MAYBE I'll turn back..." 7. "Oh we got 2 minutes left, and we're at 80% cap. Let's just get out of island cover and risk getting reset by the other guy getting one more salvo in, cause I might get one more salvo in too!" 8. "Oh was that the edge of the capture zone? Sorry, I was in gunner mode..." 9. Think capping is "lame" and a draw is somehow better. Or wait it's not. Everyone's suddenly a noob for not winning according to the silent people who didn't coach (properly) at all. 10. With 50 seconds to go, being the only one near cap, with three of our units alive on our team and in position to cap the enemy base at 65%, should I reset one of these guys capping for 70%, or should I just shoot at the only guy that's closer but not in the cap circle?" 11. "Oh, we're ahead in points, just and both have around 800 but two zones, I'm the only unit left near their side and they have two carriers, 1:30 minutes to go, they just failed an air attack from 20km distance and are just now flying back. Let's try to close in on those two carriers. Maybe I can cross 10km in half a minute, instead of increasing the distance for the 7 squadrons of aircraft they might spawn to fly..." etc. I mean, how does one's brain work if you can't recognise what to do in such a situation to simply chose to ensure a win? Why do people suicide for the chance of 100 more exp, while risking losing 400-1000 exp? I just don't get it.

Uhm. Just to inform you: you're saying you're a bad BB player right now.

One option: If your rudder is center, fake a turn: pretend to dodge to one side (the one most your turrets don't face), hit full reverse to change his lead and turn a bit more to get you in the best torp angle, hard turn to your other side (keep turning away), blast away while the DD is still turning torps in the proper direction. A ram may be an option too, if he can't get to your side. Another option is to almost ram him and get so close along side the torps didn't activate yet, which is usualy only doable if you're in a narrow like the one at C in Fault Line. In which case you might as well just keep it in front. But avoiding this situation is usualy better. Which is just about map awareness and maintaining distances and spot checks of corridors before you turn into m.

The point you're trying to make is that people prefer a fight to the end. But the point is that in many cases by simply playing smart you also have that fight but in a way you also stand a chance to win. There is no logic to not doing that. When you got 4 minutes left and need to find a DD with a battleship, you're not going to find it if you chase it and it doesn't want to be found. If you cap it will have to come to you. If not, at least you don't waste time getting to the next actual fight. The pay-off for a loss CAN be up to about 2000 (without premium), but you would have to be the top two and do really well, otherwise it is much lower. I usualy do make it to the top and it far often isn't more than an average score. But it is no guarantee and I certainly don't go out of my way for that when I can have the win bonus on top of a good game. And I certainly won't go out of my way to do so when it is practically impossible or unlikely to achieve not just more but sufficient damage for the win. If you want to fight ships, then you can create battles on your terms at that fictional circle as good as anywhere else. Whatsmore, a physical defeat or a tactical defeat amount to the same thing: you bested your opponent. In fact, a tactical defeat shows you can outplay an opponent, rather than be outplayed. But as you state yourself, when it is viable, when it isn't though, what this topic is about, it just makes no sense to try. Or to not even realise what to do to try and win. People don't seem to understand their tactical options - including what isn't an option (!). Yet a lot of those people come here. Complaining the units or game is broken... I just don't get that. But maybe these people should play some chess some time...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but how again was this a topic about scared BB / cruiser units and encounter mode DD cap heroes? Don't think I named that scenario. At all. Do explain though how come you let it happen if you and other people don't want it to happen? Clearly you rather lose to some "lame 6 minute in capping", than fight your way out of that situation. All you have to do is get in that cap circle and/or spot the one capping and reset... Which isn't hard. Did that a lot with my pre-buff CBT Amagi on the arctic map. Most other people were content to let the enemy win though and instead of doing something about it or at least covering you, back off and flee. You one of them? Cause those people don't want to have the fight last longer than 10 mins and even like losing.

Wanna bet you're aiming too high? Aiming for the waterline or for the top of the hull / superstructure? You do realise half that ship is under water?

How about the fact he is another player? That's enough reason for me to even let a tier 1 reset.

It's just a mini-Omaha, it's awesome.

He might be part of a company that produces these?

That's why I feel that when you want to buy a tier Y premium, you should have at least one other ship of tier Y.

And grind the same 15 random useless modules for every ship, including the repair kit at 100K experience points...

If at an angle, imagine an ellipse that's flattened on the top and expanded on the bottom. In other words, if they sail away from you, aim relatively closer to the ship than if they sail towards you. The angle means a part of their velocity is used to sail to or away from you. So aim a bit more to the center than you would if it was at a straight horizontal.

First of all, War Thunder stole ideas from Wargaming's World of Tanks. They improved on some (seeing inside your vehicle, keeping all your previous vehicles), but having to research multiple lines and complete tier by tier is worse grinding than if you have to go down just one line.

Facts? You want to talk FACTS? Without premium: My Kawachii (tier III): 733 xp / battle My South Carolina (tier III): 775 xp / battle My Arkansas Beta (tier IV): 849 xp / battle My Myogi (tier IV): 811 xp / battle My Wyoming (tier IV): 936 xp / battle YOUR Kawachii (tier III): 413 xp / battle YOUR South Carolina (tier III): 397 xp / battle YOUR Wyoming (tier IV): 498 xp / battle YOUR Myogi (tier IV): 398 xp / battle I don't care what you have to say, because you're not capable of objective analysis and are so self-absorbed you're unable to admit you're on the lower part of the scale where it comes to gamers. You're not who company's balance around. But indeed, SOMETHING has to be done. You need to shut up, listen to better players and learn to play. Instead of insulting us with your lies, self absorbed bias and claims that make no sense whatsoever. You're a really bad player. What you say about balance is irrelevant, because you're not anywhere close near the performance of the people who need to be balanced with the opposition. The FACT is that I and others are above average players. We can't be allowed to wield god slings just because you can't learn to aim and position and refuse to listen to smart people.

The amount of lead depends only on two things: your shell velocity and the target speed. Nothing else matters. But once you know your ship, it's nice to visualise it by comparing it to "ship lengths".

You should look for the speed of the enemy ship. The zoom you have that's most optimal for the range you're firing at is approximately for a ship sailing 20kts. Most cruisers sail between 30 and 35 knots. Most enemy BBs at about 20-30 knots. Use the flight time of shells with the same number on the marker. Aim this number underneath the center of the target. Wait for a good opportunity (steady, distracted, just made a turn). Boom, citadels.

From what I'm seeing from you, you're simply not being respectful and just made a number of biased, unfounded (and rather short sighted) personal accusations. Why should he like you?

And you're looking for a fight with someone with admin powers, aren't you? >.>

You're not part of the WG-conspiracy team? D: But that's EXACTLY what they expect you to say: to deny your involvement in conspiracies!

Please don't post "I only get 8-9 citadels, oh woe is me" threads. :/ I don't think you know what skill is if you say that. Skill is more than hitrate.

You can get a lot of second hand Nintendo games for that kind of money... :p

Actually, there's just one thing. Unit detection range. Viable torping is done from within 7km. High tier DDs can't get that close most the time. You see people who have torp hitrates of 10% go down to 2% in a Fubuki, just because they're forced to launch from much further away. Getting closer is certain death, as the enemy's firepower goes up much faster than their own HP can compensate. Sure, you get more torps to fire, but that only makes it easier to spot an incoming spread. Remember that cruiser with 40 torps? Most the time it wouldn't hit anything, since people saw one torp, realised which unit fired and would take evasive action well before the entire spread would arrive.

You know the stats page people look at often here to see how someone performs? How about we actually make better use of that? This is a bit ambitious, but I don't think it's outside of the possibilities of the webdesigners. In fact, the wot stats people do this in their free time to some extend. Let's first set some goals: Enable players to more criticaly analyse their statistics in relation to others (increase self-awareness) Reduce the ignorance of what can and can't be done with a ship (thereby reducing whining) Increase the knowledge of gameplay, playstyles, tactics, counter-measures etc by enabling a player to learn how to play better Have this be accessible from ingame Encourage and inform players of its existence Why on the stats page? Well, this is something most players go to a lot and it's the most informative way of noticing if you're doing things right. However, the current stats page lacks a lot of information and you can't easily compare with other people. Yes, there are website plugins, but they're not exactly widely known. So what would be in this center then? Point 1 & 2: Increasing self-awareness and reducing ignorance Next to your own stats, I think it's good to set a person's statistics in the context of everyone else's stats, as well as tracking a player's progress over time (most third party Wargaming statistics sites already do this). However, they often have high score lists, but those are lists of individual players. I'd rather see trendlines where a player's current position is listed with respect to others. Each of these diagrams should have the option to see your progress on the trendline over time. This should provide a much better awareness of how others are performing with the same unit and whether it is you, or if there's nobody who can do a lot better with a unit. I'm sure you'll see a spread with most people being near the bad side of things, since I feel the majority of players are mediocre or worse. But still, it's good to know where you stand and what can be gotten out of that same unit by a really good player an the top 25% really. I would suggest adding in the percentages of players in a bell curve as alternative display, or even better would be a manual slider that shows how many people are performing above a certain point on the trendline. These diagrams should be attainable for all kinds of statistics. I think it'd be nice if you could just mouse over a statistic and the diagram to the side would display the relevant diagram. Then if you click the statistic, it would fix the diagram and you could play with the diagram's settings a bit for analysis. Point 3: Teaching players. This is the crucial bit really. I would suggest a few things. On the one hand, a section with general tutorial videos on game mechanics, tactics, maneouvres, maps, teamwork benefits, etc. and on the other, a section that explains the peculiarities of each individual ship. These videos would be tips & tricks, explainations of general game mechanics, explainations of maps, as well as replays of battles. Players could submit these for general tips and tricks, or for specific units. The web team would then confirm they're good enough and tag them with the appropriate ships. For each ship, you would get a list of tutorial videos for people to review. This would make it far more accessible to check playstyle differences between your own and that of well performing players and increase knowledge transfer between players. It would also make it a lot easier to point people who need to L2P to the appropriate statistics, make a point and tell them what tutorial videos to look at, instead of having to wade through tons of low quality or different YouTube videos. Point 4 and 5: In game accessibility, informing and encouragement Simply have your personal stat page link to the website (just a button that says "detailed statistics and evaluation" or something). I think it would be good if the game notices if you're underperforming by checking if you're in the bottom 50% in terms of performance in general or if your performance is subpar compared to other ships you've used. The game might provide small pop ups or tips suggesting you to check out the learning and self-evaluation center. The game could automatically detect which ships are underperforming and provide tip-tools in Port view. For instance, you could have a buey float by when some performs badly in a St. Louis that says "Click here for St. Louis tips and tricks!" or "Become a St. Louis master, learn from the best!". Similarly, you could add an in game pop up suggesting you to watch a video on the ship when a new ships is being purchased. You could also add such links to the tech tree so people can inform themselves quickly without much hassle of going through a bunch of pages, while they search for the appropriate ship. Similarly, you could add such information videos on general classes. Especially when a new class of ship is introduced, there should be at least an introduction video (sure, you could skip it) that explains this line of ships. One vid for each nation's tech lines. Warn players of typical pitfalls, explain strengths of the line and maybe make some suggestions about modules. These videos should be available of course in the learning center, which should be linked to from the tech tree as well. I'm not interested in hearing "it's nice, but too much work", just in ways how this could be visualised and all. You don't have to tell the devs what's too much work for them. They've got years to implement this, though I'd rather see it sooner than later. But let's go beyond the blank stats page and for once teach people. It would save us all so much frustration, be it from hearing complaints or be it from not realising we're doing something wrong and getting frustrated with the results we get.

Asked some people from the stats site to have a quick read. They're quite interested in the concept it seems.